linux-kernel - Re: <IRQ> [<ffffffff810c9204>] ? __alloc_pages

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4D72FD96.6020702@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 05 Mar 2011 19:20:54 -0800
From:	"Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: <IRQ> [<ffffffff810c9204>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x622/0x696

On 03/05/2011 06:50 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Justin Mattock wrote:
>
>> [  339.787008] SLUB: Unable to allocate memory on node -1 (gfp=0x20)
>> [  339.787008]   cache: kmalloc-8192, object size: 8192, buffer size:
>> 8264, default order: 3, min order: 2
>> [  339.787008]   kmalloc-8192 debugging increased min order, use
>> slub_debug=O to disable.
>> [  339.787008]   node 0: slabs: 181, objs: 543, free: 0
>> [  339.790575] skbuff alloc of size 3904 failed
>> [  339.823775] swapper: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x4020
>> [  339.823781] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.38-rc7-00143-gd1b152c #7
>> [  339.823783] Call Trace:
>> [  339.823786]<IRQ>   [<ffffffff810c9204>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x622/0x696
>> [  339.823811]  [<ffffffffa015a077>] ? ath_rxbuf_alloc+0x29/0x9a [ath]
>> [  339.823815]  [<ffffffff810f67cf>] ? new_slab+0x7b/0x1c6
>> [  339.823819]  [<ffffffffa015a077>] ? ath_rxbuf_alloc+0x29/0x9a [ath]
>> [  339.823823]  [<ffffffff810f6dd6>] ? T.925+0x163/0x29c
>> [  339.823827]  [<ffffffff810c4ecc>] ? mempool_destroy+0xf/0x17
>> [  339.823832]  [<ffffffffa015a077>] ? ath_rxbuf_alloc+0x29/0x9a [ath]
>> [  339.823836]  [<ffffffff810f895a>] ? __kmalloc_track_caller+0xfe/0x190
>>
>
> Order-2 atomic allocations are always going to be difficult since we can't
> do synchronous compaction or reclaim, but I'd try the suggestion shown
> above: boot with slub_debug=O or disable slub debugging so that
> kmalloc-8192 is actually order-1 like it should be.
>

alright! I will leave that setting on in the boot options to see if this 
happens again.

Justin P. Mattock
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/